I am German myself and I am disgusted how the German media and politicians are only blaming Greece. Some conservative papers (like welt.de) are ticking out completely and are turning to phrases that are very close to our Nazi history and are not allowing overly critical comments.

How Germans could chop down wages so quickly and without much opposition from the people and other parties?
The main reason is Hartz IV. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartz_concept
Its a reform for the unemployed people, which at first sight doesnt have much to do with wages of the working people. But it does have everything to do with it. Let me explain:
Before Hartz IV unemployed people didnt have much to fear from the state. They got their unemployment (Sozialhilfe) money every month which was enough to live without much fear of anything. It didnt mean much to be unemployed. But people found a job if they wanted to. Of course, like every country, it was exploited by a tiny minority. People were happy with it and many countries were envious of that system because it provided so much social security that people got very peaceful and crime rates were pretty much non-existent.

Hartz IV was planned to cut the massive costs of that social system. The left wing government (which turned out to be massive hypocrites), a coalition of a socialist party and a green party, claimed it would decrease unemployment rates massively and save lots of tax money and they would force those lazy useless unemployed people to get jobs. They emphasized on "the hard earning people whos tax money is stolen by lazy unemployed" and used the tiny minority of exploiters to get Hartz IV under way. Hartz IV was basically a cut for unemployed people where they would barely have enough money to live from or pay the rent from it. It also allowed the government to use many tricks to adjust the unemployment rate. They for example excluded people who were unemployed at a certain age or people who were send on useless trainings (like how you write a job application or how you use a PC), which were forced on them from the government. If they didnt attend, they would get cuts on the already not enough Hartz IV money.

They got it through the parliament (since there was no oppositon of mention thank to their "democratic" coalition) and it went all downhill from there. Unemployed people were suddenly massively discriminated, even by the politicians, because they had created so much hate against unemployed and built many stereotypes in the process, supported by stupid fake shows in the media, just to push Hartz IV through. As I said before, they only used the minority that exploited the system before in their arguments, and didnt care about the majority. That also lead to companies falling for the created stereotype and not employing people who had been using Hartz IV at one time and even going as far as them looking at older employees as inferior. They got rid of them in a massive purge, which also led to the trick of excluding old people near pension-age from the unemployment statistics. Pensions dropped because those old fired people didnt get a job anymore and had to use Hartz IV. That meant that they had to use up their savings before they get Hartz IV money (that rule is part of Hartz IV), which drained old people of their money and also caused them to get caught in an even worse trap:
After a few years of getting Hartz IV money, they dropped to the lowest pension rate, which was barely above Hartz IV. It didnt matter if they worked 40 years of their life in a well paid job. Now they were poor and would never get a pension that was appropriate to their former job. That lead to a massive shift in wealth away from the normal people (middle class and poor), to the rich people. The buying power of Germans was destroyed, and it became even worse after the socialist/conservative government (yes, a stupid coalition like that is possible here) increased the sales tax by 3% to a whopping 19%. As result of this living costs exploded and black labor skyrocketed. Cost of energy of any kind, taxes, food prices, gas, rents, every day stuff you need increased massively. The Euro was to blame too, because prices of many things (especially food) were just exchanged 1-1 to the Euro. So for example if there was cheese before that cost 1 Deutsche Mark, it would now cost 1 Euro, even though 1 Euro was worth 2 Deutsche Mark. Wages collapsed, while everything got much more pricy. Hartz IV made all that worse.
Now for the main reason how Hatz IV pushed wages down:
The fear of dropping into Hartz IV (for the reasons I mentioned) was massive. Nobody ever wanted to drop into Hartz IV because they knew then everything was over. So they accepted extremely low wage jobs, even if that meant they would get less money than they would from Hartz IV, which already was barely enough to live a crappy live from. They took 2, 3, 4 shitty paid jobs instead, and the companies loved it, because they saved a lot of money with that. The problem with that was that even well educated people had fear of Hartz IV and accepted lower wages because of it. Wages didnt rise for 20 years (and they dont rise much now either). Yet living costs, as I said, increased massively. It all came together.
Germanys economy was very low at one point, yet they still tried to tell us that the unemployment rate dropped again (even 2007/08 and every year after that). People started to learn how they manipulated us and now we are here. Companies making revenue records after revenue records, yet nothing is arriving at the people. The media claims everything is well, the statistics still lie to us that the unemployment rate is low, but its not.
And now they are trying to blame the Greeks for our problems. Just like the unemployed Germans before, and the stupid masses fall for it again.
Yet they still wonder why Germans are a dying breed (population has been dropping for years now), and dont get that having children is very expensive in Germany and only few people still have money or time for that (since both women and men have multiple jobs to be able to live) because of these developments.

See, this is why it needs to be shown the rise in joules, and a total energy rise in the entire planetary system, not just some arbitrary surface temperature rise....because people like you (no insult intended here) genuinely see the small relative figure and think...eh its no big deal.

Its a huge deal.

We are losing gigantic chunks of the otherwise permanent ice shelf in south and north arctic areas.

With those gone, we have otherwise what would have been massive mirrors, which reflect light...now acting as big old heating blankets (the water is effectively a black body to sunlight, absorbs it like no other..).

That right there is called a positive feedback loop. You start with something small, and within no time (geologically speaking), its in runaway growth.

The frozen tundra in greenland is home to enormous pockets of trapped methane....not for much longer. (source: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v8/n1/abs/ngeo2305.html)

Methane's impact on global warming (i.e. energy RETENTION within our planetary weather system) is 25 times greater than an equivalent amount of C02. (source: http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html).

Further to this video, when you heat up the ocean systems beyond a certain threshold, the natrual pumping systems which circulate warm surface water to the deeper parts of the ocean for cooling, just flat out stop working. (source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19895974), leading to the slow heat-death of a vast swath of temperatue sensitive biomes....which, when they are active and growing healthily, actually contribute to c02 depletion (carbon based lifeforms 'use up' carbon to be 'made').

...I could go on, but you see....even just a cursory glance at some of the 'smaller' impacts is pretty compelling enough to consider the phrase 'no big deal' a bit of a misnomer.

Do your research....it is catastrophic, and it is likely to happen in your lifetime (if you are under 30 atm).

Your grandchildren and great grandchildren will be living in a drastically different global environment.

No biggie though, cause we got electric cars coming online in the next 30 years or so

FYI I was thinking $1500/month to 3000$/month. Which would make 75 to 150$/day.

Its nice to have a civil discourse with you.


Other than the clarification above I AGREE WITH ALL THE BENEFITS YOU MENTION.


All I am saying is it the responsibility of the employer to pay for this benefit?


Should the young couple or single woman wait till they can afford such time off? With all the family planning available should the couple or single woman take some responsibility.


According to report California and few other states have placed a tax of sorts to spread this cost over all its citizens. I do not see an issue with this as long all are taxed equal.

-----------------------------------------------------
My reform plan

We do need welfare and social security reform ( which will have to happen) it should be 1 in the same. Everyone over 25 should be able to take 10 years of government paid time off (PTO).

All get 10 years, All pay a tax, call it what you want. But when it is used up then that's it. no more government cheese.

If I am 25 and going to school I should be able to collect a year or two OF government PTO ( paid time off). Your choice.

If I have a baby and want to take 3 months off then I will have 9 years 9 months left for retirement.

If I turn 40 and find myself lost in life and just want to check out of society and go back to school or travel the world for 2 years then I would have 8 years left.

I don't care what you spend you government check on. Schooling, traveling, hookers, drugs. Its you life.

When I turn 65 and think I will still live another 20 I better not retire with my remaining PTO time.

Its your life use it when you need it.


This would stop all the complaining towards welfare people. Also it will keep people from retiring early and sucking tax dollars for years to come. It would naturally provide an incentive to work and to stay working.

There would be no unemployment benefits. Other programs eliminated and rolled into this program. It would streamline the government. Reduce government costs create a a level playing field for citizens. Your PTO pay should be based on you current skill level with minimums and caps.


Granted this is a pie in the sky ideal world thought. But it does have some merit.

Have a good day.

Without spoiling the plot, I'd like to point out that Matt was quite used up by the time he entered this hallway.

I thought you were going into the sarcastic for a minute there (as in; "they are obviously much safe now" lol.

This would be pretty useful up high in Afghanistan or on the Syrian border over ISIS; no fuel needs, probably surprisingly hard to shoot down with standard small arms, essentially infinite duration, the ability to have a ground tracking radar mode---Very useful indeed.

*promote this awesomeness (and use up the power point I got for the last battle ~_^)

When I first started volunteering to serve at a homeless shelter, many years ago, I didn't know exactly why I was doing it. Certainly it felt like the "right" thing to do. I was at least confident that I wasn't doing it for personal gain because I didn't wear it on my sleave, didn't brag about it or hang my ego on my personal identity of being a good person. When dissillusionment set in, when I realized just how many of the people I was serving were homeless by choice, I pushed through and carried on...and I still didn't know why. I just trusted that I would get it one day.

Eventually I made a connection to the time I spent living in Sweden. In the town I lived in, every night a group of vagrants assembled in the market square. Every bit as dirty and drunken as the worst homeless person that most people imagine them all to be. Fighting, having sex in the public restroom, vomiting and carrying on loudly all night. But this was socialism, so they went home every night to their government payed for apartments. I realized that no matter what you do, there will always be a segment of society that just doesn't give a Fuck and is happy to take and never give back. We've all known these people. Family members, friends, acquaintances, who use up the good will of everyone they meet until they've got no one left to use and it falls to the larger community to support them. No economy, government or community planning will ever compell them to support themselves. We loathe them and shun them. Politicians with ulterior motives tell us that ALL homeless and disadvantaged ARE them. But it's a lie. There are the mentally and physically ill who have no support structure, who NEED their communities to help them. Most of these people were once functioning members of their communities who no longer have the ability to survive on their own.
And so I came to understand that it's better to feed a hundred leaches to serve a single helpless individual.

Boy was I proud of myself for realizing that.

And then I was layed off and my job shipped to India, followed closely by my wife spending a year in and out of the hospital, with no insurance. A careers worth of hard work, reduced to a data point on a corporate profit sheet. Waiting for the other shoe to drop, when the medical debt comes for me and everything I've built in my life is taken, to become a line in someone else's ledger. Betrayed by the greed in the system. Because I upheld my end of the social contract. I worked hard in school, excelled in my career, had two kids and bought a house in a neighborhood with good schools. But the system is run by the greediest and most power hungry. Politics and business is the domain of the high functioning sociopath. And to a sociopath, you're not a real person like them. You're a data point, a line in the ledger.

Then I came to respect the other segment of the homeless. The ones who rejected the social contract, who don't feel societal pressure to give more than they take. Because they got it right. It's all a lie. You don't earn anything in America. You don't deserve the fruits of your labor. You subsist at the whim of the people with money and power. And when it serves them, you get nothing.

We are all standing in line for food, hoping there's a room for the night.

i think that cat probably used up more than 1 life to survive all of that.

Cell phones are a tool, nothing more or less. They can be useful (up to and including saving lives) or you can use them like an inconsiderate knob-end (up to and including killing someone).

I don't think glass in it's current form will catch on, it just looks too stupid. But the basic idea (i.e. a HUD with augmented reality)... IMO that's almost certain to become ubiquitous. Unintrusive access to data is just too useful not to.

As for the recording light, I place zero faith in it. Short of building it into a tamper proof case with sealed software, it's just too trivially easy to disable.

Again, I'm with you in that I find the implications troubling. But I think we might be the last generation to find it so. None of my friends kids has any concept of a division between private and public lives. They've all grown up with social media of one form or another, and it simply doesn't occur to them not to share everything online.

I am copy-pasting my previous comment from here:

For those totally unfamiliar with Snooker, let me explain a couple of points: Putting the black earns you 7 points, but you'll have to put one red before putting another.

So there really is only ONE way to get 147. you have to put all the balls in exactly this order. red,black,red,black.... and so on until all reds are down, then you HAVE to do yellow,green,brown,blue,pink and finish it of with black. ONLY that order. He could NOT, for instance, pop down the blue or something in the middle there, it HAS to be in this particular order.

Now, most of you have probably tried pool. And if you think pool is hard (like me) try just looking at a snooker table, its about twice as big, and the balls are smaller, and the holes are f¤%&&ing IMPOSSIBLE to put into. Not only are they smaller, but unlike a pool table, they have these rounded edges that makes it even harder.

So when I said this is hard, I really, really mean it. Only an elite few in the world can do this, and it doesnt happen often. Even in big star games like this reaching 100 is considered really, really good. The fact that O'sullivan does this one in 6 and a half minutes, and another one in 5 minutes and 20 seconds, makes him one of the coldest sons'o'bitches on the whole planet IMO, and its one of the greatest sports achievements ever.

Points for the various colors:

red-1

yellow-2
green-3
brown-4
blue-5
pink-6
black-7

Every color, except red, gets placed back on the table, for as long as there are reds left, so you COULD do red-blue,red-yellow, red-black and so on, except then you are "using up" reds to put low-scoring balls, so to make 147, you have to start with red-black,red-black etc.

When all the reds are down, the remaining balls, have to be done in the order of their points, from 2 to 7

The roads have a capacity.
~15 feet per car.

100 feet of road will fit about 6 or 7 cars, bumper to bumper.
Alternatively, 100 cars will require 1500 feet of distance to fit.

If a driver keeps 30 feet in front of him, at all times, even when stopped in traffic, then that takes the total per-car size up to 45 feet.
100 feet of road now fits 2 cars.
100 cars now require 4500 feet of distance to fit.

The greater the distance kept between cars, the bigger the strain on road capacity, and the farther back the traffic jam will stretch.



Traffic jams in massive commuter areas do not exist because people are driving too close.

They exist because the rate of people entering the highway exceeds the rate of people exiting the highway, for a long enough duration that the highway 'runs out of room' to fit the cars.

You can widen the roads to increase capacity, so the traffic jam doesn't go as far back.
You can increase highway speed limits, so that people can attempt to 'evacuate' the highway faster.

(Travel-capacity in terms of cars-per-second of any given section of road, is 'cars-per-second-per-lane x number-of-lanes'. Increasing either factor will improve travel.)

...But you can't eliminate the jam.

The rate of 'highway exit' is determined by the number of exits, and the capacity of the exit roads to absorb traffic from the highway.

When people exit from a highway, they usually go into local traffic, and are met by a light within 100 feet.
Between the lights, and other cars looking for parking spots, pedestrians, etc, local traffic is a dog.

Highway traffic can't diffuse out of the exits fast enough, and the traffic backs up on the exit ramps, and then backs up onto the highway. Once the traffic backs up onto the highway, exiting traffic consumes a lane for queuing, which forms a choke.


Basically, to avoid a jam, the rate of people entering the highway can not exceed the maximum possible rate of people exiting and diffusing into the destination city.

Because 'everyone goes to work at once', and local traffic is not geared to rapidly absorb exiting traffic, the jams are unavoidable.

Driving with a massive space in front, refusing to fill in the gap, only uses up the highway's buffering capacity more quickly.
That leads to the 'complete' jam happening sooner, where traffic is queued all the way from the destination, all down the highway, and onto the feeder roads miles away, blocking local traffic elsewhere.




IMO, if people really care abut stopping traffic jams, they should put a commuter parking lot at every exit at major commuter areas.

When you exit off of the highway, you would immediately wind your way through a parking lot, and at the other end of the lot you would exit into local traffic.

The parking lot acts as a buffer, allowing the highway exit lane to not get backed up, and prevents the queue from building up onto the highway.

That way the traffic on the highway can travel without chokes.

Although, this would just move the "parking lot" occurring on the highway, into a literal parking lot. You'd still be stuck waiting a while, as the rate of people exiting the parking lot into local traffic would still be limited by the rate at which local traffic can absorb the highway traffic.

Basically, to have literally no waiting, the city streets absorbing exiting highway traffic need the same uninterrupted cumulative bandwidth as the highway.

In the end, if you want to fix highway traffic jams, fix city streets.




You can make the argument that keeping more space in front will make people more comfortable with driving faster, and traffic will move faster.
But, that faster moving traffic will merely more quickly arrive at the same clogged exit, and queue with the same other cars waiting to get onto the local roads.

-scheherazade

Nah, he should of just left and called security or the cops. Let them use up some of their pepper spray quota.

This type of stupidity doesn't bug me. No real damage is happening.

When fuckers throw EGGS is when major paint damage occurs. You see someone throw eggs at a car "for fun" you have my permission to smack them around. The cracking egg shells wreck paint terribly. People who egg someone's car are vandalizing it.

Ok, lets say you want to buffer the whole video...cool, youve just used up say, 10mb of bandwidth to buffer a video.

You get 600kb through it, and decide....nah, boring. Close the video.

You have just wasted 94% of the bandwidth delivered to you. Well played sir.

Multiply this by how many people dont finish a video through to its end? Thats a lot of wasted bandwidth.